Jason Smathers has done an incredible job getting these tapes through a Freedom of Information Act request, and up on the Internet for people to see first hand what transpired in 2005 when a phony "Turkish-born" former Muslim was given an audience in front of our Marines. The videos are marked with comments that allow you to skip to hear important parts.

It is one thing to listen to Caner spin his yarns of his days growing up in Turkey when he is front of the guffaw'ing Ohio Free Will Baptist men who are absolutely eating out of his hand. What's the harm: they hear some good stories, hear some great ethnic jokes, get some laughs, and return home to their churches in Ohio.

But to watch a Colonel stand in front of his soldiers and tell them they are about to hear from a Turkish-born Muslim, who came to the states at age 14 through New York, describing him as someone who has seen the "Islamic culture from both sides" just makes my blood boil. These are people who weren't there for a laugh, they weren't gullible Christians on a retreat hoping to be entertained; they were there to try to learn from an expert the culture of the country where they all will have a big target on their chest.

During his talk he speaks of himself as a Turk, familiar with Turkish culture, with half-sisters being taught to read, and cousins in northern Iraq who voted for the first time because of the troops. And he then proceeds to speak to them as one who knows the Islamic culture because of his experiences as a Turkish Muslim - with all of the best yarns mixed in that he spun in front of the churches.

I can't wait to hear what Norm Geisler, Tim Guthrie, Peter Lumkins, and Tim Rogers come up with to defend this, and to read their creative attacks on Jason Smathers for releasing these videos.

Get ready Jason, the attack dogs will be ready to rip you to shreds for continuing to shine the light.

Ergun Caner, it is NOT too late for you to make a full public Confession, followed by public Repentance and seek Restoration from your Christian brothers and sisters in Christ. God will allow you to do great work, only if you humble yourself and seek forgiveness.

I would strongly encourage all those pastors and theologians who are friends of Ergun Caner to encourage him to a public Confession.

Sorry Thy Peace - the call will be that it is not too late for the hate-filled bloggers to repent of their wicked deeds, their jealousies, their desire to bring down a "man of God". If only the bloggers would humble themselves and seek forgiveness, they could be restored - after they repented of their reformed views, of course.

We have heard the same story on so many different occasions. Caner has done so much harm in his years of lying. I would not attend a conference where Caner is speaking unless he repents publically and sets the record straight about when he came to the USA. What is hard to believe is that Lumpkins, Guthrie, Towns and Geisler believe that this guy was not lying all the years he made these statements about when he came to the USA.

In case you haven't noticed Jax, they are using a much more subtle approach to attack. They are all posting strawmen posts on what they think Calvinists believe about infant death. It's their plan of attack and has been for about a month now. They really think they have us on this one. Thinking this will be the final blow, if this doesn't work they will find another piece of Calvinist theology to blow out of proportion. That is their current plan of attack.

Lydia: This is national security we are talking about. This is putting our soldiers lives at risk, of course they should check each person who speaks to them out. This is not ever a time to just take someone's word for it. That is insanity.

I wrote a blog addressing the teaching of the damnation of infants at: http://powerfulprecepts.blogspot.com/2010/07/damnation-of-infants.html

In it I noted that it is some hyper calvinists who teach this. I've been personally affected by this as we had a family in our church lose their 2 1/2 year old daughter in a terrible accident about a month ago.

Two reformed guys that I personally know hold to this view. But I also know that this is not the view of mainstream calvinists. I have a great Spurgeon quote in this blog that I just love where he calls people who belive such things "miscreants and criminals".

If Mohammad Khan is still reading this blog, I would encourage him to comment on the "islamic content" of the two videos posted and their veracity. If in Ergun Caner's style of embellishment and lies, he misled here, then it is telling of the duplicity.

Christa, you said, "Our troops deserve a thousand times better than such a sham"

That is what I thought also; it made me sick to think about. Then i thought, what about the church??? He said these same lies to God's people.... WAIT!! Lying is unacceptable in any situation and he did this over and over and over.... unbelievable.

Caner defenders, you are unbelievable. You don't think he intentionally lied about his father having many wives at the same time, that he came to the USA as a teenager...etc...

Lydia - about your question on why they should have to vet a professor from Liberty.

2 Reasons:

1. He claimed to be a former Muslim trained in Jihad. Key words: "Muslim" and "Jihad".

2. Mike Warnke.

Warnke was used by law enforcement agencies to train them on satan workshipping cults. He duped them. He may have given them some factually correct information about cults, but he used his fake background as a platform of believability. He COULD have given them wrong information, and they WOULD have believed him.

That is the problem with Caner's speech. Let's assume the best - that Caner gave them all correct information, based on his reading and research, but NOT on his experience. But he just as easily could have given them WRONG information, even information that if they used it could cause them harm. He used his fake background of being raised in Turkish culture as one to be a profound EXPERT, so that anything he told them would have been believable. Each man who heard him speak, if they doubted some of his information, probably said "But this guy GREW UP there, it must be right."

I imagine these guys have received hours and hours of training for their deployment on the culture they were entering, some of which MIGHT have been in contradiction with Caner. Who might the Marine believe? The Marines formal training, or the guy who LIVED there, and GREW UP there? Probably the latter...only that was not true, and whatever training they received from the Marines should have trumped Caner's by a mile.

If you're going to put in front of troops and officers of the Marines a former Muslim, then by golly at least do the minimum check. Make sure that what he wrote about his background in his book "Unveiling Islam" meshes with his story of being raised in Turkey and trained in Beirut.

Just a hunch....perhaps the colonel who introduces Caner was the impetus for this meeting. He had a common connection with Caner, as he said he was from a town not far from Caner's hometown in Ohio.

Caner gives these guys advice on the Turkish and Islamic culture as though he was ONE OF THEM...as though he grew up there. They should have made sure that he was indeed one of them.

Did you catch Caner's vivid description of a muslim man in tight jeans under his "geffia"...so tight, Caner said, that the seam of the pants showed his "mangina".

"Mangina"? Is he serious?

This goes to show that Caner likes to know his audience and speak to their level. He lowered himself to what he thought would be acceptable in a room of Marines. Thankfully when he said that there were audible groans in the audience.

When he goes to a church to speak of blacks with satellite dish hats and shoes that match their suits that match their cars...he does that to audiences that he thinks will yuck it up over racial stereotypes.

Lydia: This is national security we are talking about. This is putting our soldiers lives at risk, of course they should check each person who speaks to them out. This is not ever a time to just take someone's word for it. That is insanity.

Debbie,

I am not sure how Caner's talk to the military effected our national security or put these soldiers lives at risk. Could you expound on that? I would be interested in hearing how you connect those dots.

The military trusted the Liberty "brand". I am saying I can understand why they would assume they could trust Liberty to vet their own president. As a matter of fact, I would say the Liberty brand is what gave Caner credibility.

And I wonder how many groups he spoke to. Two?

but now the military and everyone else knows that Liberty cannot be trusted to vet their own president even with thier own honor code. It is a pretty big rude awakening for many.

I think it is a mistake to blame the military. I blame Liberty. They hoodwinked many.

Lydia - see my post just a few mintutes ago to address the question of the harm Caner might have done.

Look, he probably did no harm. Maybe everything he gave them - his insights on Islamic culture, Turkish culture, customs, etc. was not false, and based on his reading and research.

But the point is, that he COULD have given them wrong information. The Marines exposed their officers and their soldiers to someone who spoke with a false authority. He was NOT the man that the colonel told them he was. This opened their minds to give more credence to Caner's talks than he deserved.

That is dangerous. What if Caner gave them information or recommendations on how to behave in their operations that contradicted their formal training? Would they have given Caner's view more credence because he supposedly WAS one of the enemy and grew up in that culture?

The Marines absolutely cannot be happy with this. No question that colonel who introduced him and gave his fellow officers factually incorrect information (that he no doubt received from Caner) about Caner is embarrassed and angry. I would be if I were him.

Warnke was used by law enforcement agencies to train them on satan workshipping cults. He duped them. He may have given them some factually correct information about cults, but he used his fake background as a platform of believability. He COULD have given them wrong information, and they WOULD have believed him."

What prominent Christian university was promoting Warnke that caused law enforcement to see him as an expert?

“Americans have a right to expect that witnesses who testify under oath before Congress will tell the truth,” United States Attorney Ronald C. Machen Jr. said in a statement announcing the indictment. “Our government cannot function if witnesses are not held accountable for false statements made before Congress. Today the message is clear: if a witness makes a choice to ignore his or her obligation to testify honestly, there will be consequences.”

Is it not sad that there are more dire consequences of not telling truth under oath than in a pulpit of a baptist church? If teachers who teach The Word are not afraid of God but are afraid of man made laws ... what does all this tell us? That the world has come into the church and the salt is all but washed away.

Just the other day a Federal judge ruled it was freedom of speech for anyone to claim that they are a Medal of Honor recipient. What is this world coming to? Worse and worse and it has crept into our churches. I say get out while you still have the opportunity to show REAL WISDOM!!!!

I don't support what Ergun Caner did nor do I think that Liberty responded in a timely or appropriate fashion, but to continually call Liberty a diploma mill is ridiculous.

Granting honorary doctorates is a common practise among several institutions of higher learning. Harvard, Yale, Princeton and others practise this. Further, Liberty is a regionally accredited university. It is regionally accredited by Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, and Liberty's law school is fully accredited by the American Bar Association.

If you have NOT earned a Degree from an accredited school, and I mean worked for years to achieve this degree like your suppose to, DO NOT tell me or anyone on here it is OK to flaunt that DR. title in front of any name!

Liberty is just one of these deceptive schools promoting these FAKE degrees that is nothing but a pure LIE!

Lies and deception have NO room for debate in the christian world, and I will NEVER accept FAKE degrees from FAKE ministers -

I was simply stating that the granting of honorary doctorates has been a common practise in the academic history of America. Harvard and Yale began as divinity schools, and both practise the granting of honorary degrees. That in and of itself does not warrant being called a degree mill.An honorary degree is just that it's honorary, it's given to honor someone. If you have an earned doctorate Dr. Who I would say it's a safe bet that the institution that conferred your degree has granted some honorary degrees.

I agree that a pastor or anyone else who holds such degrees should disclose that they are honorary.

As far as your statement "Stop trying to collect that extra dollars using deception." I truly hope that wasn't directed at me because I have no "fake" degrees.

I am sure that if you contacted Jerry Vines, he would say what Geisler, Lumpkins and Guthrie have said, he apologized for “misstatements” so we have forgiven him. Our response would be, they weren’t misstatements, they were flat out lying through his teeth statements meant to deceive people into thinking he was trained in jihad and came to America as a teenager and that his father had many wives at one time etc…. versus the truth that he came as a two or three year old. Ergun is responsible for the continued dialog on his lying because he will not address any of the charges or correct things like when he came to America. His website still has an article that says he came in 1978 [http://www.erguncaner.com/2008/05/19/message-to-korean-churches/ ] **You need to check it out before he takes it down! Ergun’s Liberty website page said that had that he came in 1979, but it was taken down and no explanation from Caner has been made on when he really came America.

Most of these names I would expect will continue to support Caner and throw speaking engagements his way while he tries to rehab his repuatation.

Remember, Vines spoke at Gilyard's church knowing full well of his sexual molestations and never said a word.

Patterson alos supported Gilyard and told his victims they did not have 3 witnesses to his sexual molestation. He also fired Dr. Klouda for being a woman Hebrew prof and tells a story about how he told one woman who was being beaten by her husband to go home and pray more. (He tends to do what Caner does with exaggerations so he ends this story with some miraculous conversion but he refuses to back the story up)

Stanley once told SBC leaders at the famous airport meeting (where some at FBCDallas and Criswell wanted to fire Patterson), that anyone who went against him at his Atlanta church either got cancer, lost their job or worse. In other words, do not dare disagree with him or God will get you.

Such are our leaders. And you wonder why Caner is speaking with them? So, why is ANYONE supporting these guys as "spiritual" leaders?

It is indeed upsetting and confusing when a preacher holds up the Bible and says "I believe this is the inerrant word", but doesn't adhere to the same position when a defense of the same Bible is called for and needed.

If you read that comment closely, I believe that commentor is referring to Vines speaking at Gilyard's church after Vines retired, when it WAS known of Gilyard's sexual sins in the late 80s and early 90s prior to coming to Shiloh.

Did Vines know of Gilyard's sins for which he is now in jail, when he preached at Gilyard's church? Of course not, and the commentor is not saying so.

One surprising this about this release of the two videos by Jason Smathers is the utter silence from Ergun Caner's friends. Have they finally leaned the lesson not to defend the un-defensible? Or have they learnt the lesson to keep low profile (finally!!!). Of course we can disregard the a priori jump here. Interesting to notice the communication links between Ergun Caner and Tim Guthrie are working well.

Point is, no one ever has suggested, that I know of, that Jerry Vines knew of Gilyard's latest deeds when Vines spoke at his church in 2006 and/or 2007. That would be ridiculous. Obviously if Vines knew of Gilyard's continued sins at Shiloh he would not have preached there in 2006 and 2007.

When this person says "molestations" the only logical interpretation is they are referring to what Vines HAS been criticized for: going to speak at Gilyard's church when Vines knew of the numerous accusations against Gilyard back in his days at Criswell and churches in Texas and Oklahoma in the 80's and 90's.

In my view, Vines and Patterson were fooled once by Gilyard in the 1980s by his phony story of living homeless under a bridge, and his insatiable appetite for young women, including his pursuit of a young women at Vines' own church...and then Vines showed poor judgment by going to Gilyard's church to preach in 2006/2007 thinking Gilyard had repented when Gilyard was doing his deeds again at Shiloh.

John Wylie, the issue that concerns me is not who does or does not have an "earned" doctorate. Those things are a dime-a-dozen in evangelical churches today. One can be "earned" with little investment in time, and some investment of money, when ones ego requires such a title to validate his calling. The greater issue to me is the diploma mill that IS Liberty Baptist Seminary. Unlike most reputable seminaries in North America, Liberty awards a minimalist M. Div. degree with online study and only 72 semester hours required for graduation. Why? Because a few years ago the DOD decided to lower it's requirements to accommodate the LDS Church. They established 72 hours as the minimum level of graduate religious study required for commissioning as a military chaplain. Rather than continue the 90+ hours requirement for an M. Div., like most seminaries and divinity schools, Mr. Caner directed LBTS to go for the minimum in training prospective chaplains. That has resulted in ill prepared, generally inexperienced candidates being endorsed for military chaplaincy and commissioned to provide spiritual guidance for your military sons and daughters. From my perspective, that is a greater threat than Mr. Caner's lies at New River Air Station. The Marines know when people are "just blowing smoke;" they ascertained that from Caner's sessions in 2005. Don't worry that the Marines were duped or placed at greater risk due to Caners false witness. They will seldom trust the instruction of an outside teacher, if it conflicts with the evaluation conducted by the S-2 (intelligence officer).

I understand your point but that does not qualify Liberty as a diploma mill. You cannot hold regional accreditation and be a diploma mill. A diploma mill basically grants degrees for little or no work. While I agree that their MDIV program should be more rigorous, requiring 72 hours cannot in any way be contrued as giving a diploma away.

I am not an alumnus of Liberty, but I have personally seen their course work and writing requirements and they are credible.

As far as your comments about the doctorates are concerned, I understand what your saying, but I was responding to one of the earlier comments basically implying that all these preachers had honorary doctorates. That's simply not true and I felt it should be addressed. Just like the charge of Liberty being a diploma mill, that may be what some people believe, but the facts say that it's not. Liberty has a full law school that meets all the requirements of the ABA for accreditation, they do not grant such recognition to diploma mills.

"80% of Iraq as you know are Shia. Only 20% or less are Sunni. So in the midst of this, you came and gave us the one thing that can unite us other than war. Three times in Islamic history we have been united. Three: once against Charles Martel, the grand-father of Charlemagne, Charlemagne. Second time under Saladin in the Crusades. Third time, February 23rd, 1998, the signing of the fatwa by Osama bin Muhammad bin Laden, Rasul Rahman, al-Zawahiri. Other than that we've fought against each other. We always unite when there is a common enemy, a common 'Iblis,' Devil, 'Shaitan,' Satan. It's you."(Base Theater, 16:57).

First of all it's not 80% of Iraqis who are Shi'ite but 60%. Notice, however, that he's claiming bin Laden united all Muslims against a common enemy. Is that factual? The best estimate I can find for bin Laden's support is 7%: The Battle for Hearts and Minds: Moderate vs. Extremist Views in the Muslim World). Many in the Middle East believe wild conspiracy theories about 9/11; this 7% is a figure for people who actually supported the attack. It's scary enough that 7% of one billion plus people want to kill us, but why does EC say that someone who has the support of 7% has 'united' the Muslim world? If the Marines had believed this, what would they have done? Where would they have looked for friends? I'm glad they didn't believe it.

John, Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary is NOT accredited by The Association of Theological Schools, THE accrediting agency for seminaries and divinity schools in North America. It is true the University is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, and that is good. However, let me give you an example: Gardner-Webb University, a Baptist school in North Carolina, is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, but the Divinity School is accredited by ATS. The same can be said by every reputable Baptist Seminary or Divinity in the country. ATS is the "gold standard" for insuring a quality theological education. That is my point. Liberty is in a habit of taking short cuts...taking the easy route...why, because some of their seminary programs do not measure-up to the expectations one would have of a quality theological education.

I understand what you're saying and everything, but they still don't qualify as a degree mill. The US Dept of Education would disagree with that term as SACS is a USDE and CHEA recognized accrediting agency. Further, Liberty does more than just seminary training.

Should Liberty increase their rigor? I agree with you that they should, but the term degree mill is reserved for schools that basically give away diplomas for little or no work. You said it yourself that their MDIV program requires 72 hours, while that is certainly lacking compared to the 90 hours most other seminaries require, the fact that they require 72 hours means that they are not a degree mill.

I personally know a number of Liberty seminary grads and they are not somehow remedial, they are quite capable of doing great Bible exegesis.

Please don't take this as trying to be argumentative, I just don't agree with the characterization that Liberty is a degree mill.

At 41:50 of the O-Club he says, "You have a 75% illiteracy rate in the eastern parts of Turkey, in Iraq, 75%. So the only thing we believe is what we see. What we are told. What our Imam tells us in the masjid." Prior to our invasion the populace of Iraq was majority literate: "Literacy rate, 58%"(pbs). 58% literacy is no great shakes, but it's better than 25%.

"It was triangulation in its purest sense. They hate us. Let's make them hate somebody else. . .You've got Muslims who are united. We'll get them to fight each other. How do you get them to fight each other? Free one group from the other group. The only country in the world where the minority rules the majority in a Muslim country was Iraq. . .We freed 80% of one country which was suffering at the expense of 20% of the country and got them back to fighting each other. To me, in my estimation, this is just brilliant, this will go down in history as brilliant military strategy." (51:56 O-Club). Ergun repeatedly expresses the Shia/Sunni split in Iraq as 80% versus 20%. The percentage of the populace who are Shi'ites is more accurately expressed as 60%.

According to Ergun's "protocols of jihad," an "act of jihad" must receive an immediate public claim of responsibility: "For instance, very jihad must be public. Every jihad must be public. . .And so after the first bombing, 'Oh well, who did it?' Trust me, everybody's going to claim it's them, because it has to be public. But the only one who's proven true is the one who has either the precedent of saying it, or they were explicit in saying it, or in our case they were the first one to say it, and they recorded themselves saying it." (O-Club 39:12). In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, al Qaeda did not claim responsibility, either first or at all, but rather denied involvement. EC's "protocol of jihad" was thus violated. Their martyrdom videos were not released to the public "first," the denial was issued "first."

"We want democracy, but we also want capitalism. . .We're living on $80 a year." (O-Club 54:59). Who is living on $80 a year? The people of Iraq?

If the Marines listening to his ramblings had no better source of information, they would think Iraqis are 75% illiterate, have an average income of $80 a year, and that only 20% of the population is Sunni versus 80% Shi'ite. These numbers are not in the ball-park. If it's important enough for the Marines to know this information to spend tax-payer dollars bringing in a speaker, then why not bring in one who doesn't just make up numbers?

Both of you are a disgrace for letting posts come through that imply your former pastor knew of sexual MOLESTATIONS (a crime) of Darrell Gilyard yet said nothing about it. Not sexual sins (he/she said molestations in his/her post), sexual molestations (which was what was posted exactly), which is a crime.

You BOTH KNOW this to not be true, yet you let these posts come through.

Again, you BOTH are a disgrace.

Dr. Vines specifically said in an interview after Gilyard's arrest that he was asked by Gilyard to forgive him for his past, which Vines reluctantly did at the request of others and Gilyard, only to be stabbed in the back by Gilyard and his further [criminal] actions.

Whether you agree or don't agree with Vines for speaking in Gilyard's church, it was the spirit of forgiveness that Vines offered to Gilyard after many years of not even speaking to Gilyard after all Gilyard had done in the past.

You BOTH should be ashamed of yourselves for slandering your former pastor's name on this blog.

No one has ever claimed Vines knew of the most recent sexual crimes of Gilyard when he preached their in 06 and 07. That is just ridiculous.

That commentor, whoever it was, I'm certain was referring to the past "molestations" - that would be his sexual sins of the past. THAT is what Vines has been criticized for, and I'm sure that he regrets in getting duped by Gilyard.

But that's ok, it gave you a good chance to put my name and wife's name on the blog, which I'm sure gives you some satisfaction.

I'll add...what WAS a disgrace, was Vines preaching at Gilyard's church in 06 and 07 when he knew of Gilyard's past in Texas, and he knew of Gilyard's actions against one of his own sheep at FBC Jax. A pastor can forgive and reconcile with another pastor in private; but to go and preach at his church to put a stamp of approval on that's man's ministry, well, that was a disgrace.

"But that's ok, it gave you a good chance to put my name and wife's name on the blog, which I'm sure gives you some satisfaction."

No, Tom, YOU put yours and your wife's name on this blog. You have the power of moderation, do you not?

Go ahead and keep slandering everyone, even your former pastor (before you got booted out of the church). And you continue to be a disgrace in your own community, minus the weirdos who follow your blog and give you "atta boy's."

Is sexual molestation a crime? Why yes it is! And the person sent a comment claiming Vines knew of the "sexual molestations" of Gilyard. That's what he/she claimed, Tom. Sexual "molestations."

Again, sexual molestation is a crime.

Sexual sin Gilyard was accused of and proven to of done in the past, while wrong and reprehensible, WAS NOT a crime. However, again, as the poster noted, sexual molestation (he/she said), is, indeed a crime.

So stop saying no one insinuated Vines knew nothing of the sexual molestations. The idiot in the post said just that - molestations.

As for Tiffany Thigpen (which you are referring to about "sheep,") she was no victim, Tom Rich. She got hit on by Gilyard back in the 1980's. He asked her to come up to his hotel room and she refused his advances. Nothing happened between them sexually.

Again, hitting on her or any other woman while he was married was wrong and reprehensible. But she (Tiffany) was no "vicitim" of any crime or anything else other than being hit on by Gilyard. She blew off his advances and that was that.

Stop trying to make something into a an event that doesn't exist. If Tiffany can say the above is wrong, then she is a liar.

"Ergun Caner, it is NOT too late for you to make a full public Confession, followed by public Repentance and seek Restoration from your Christian brothers and sisters in Christ. God will allow you to do great work, only if you humble yourself and seek forgiveness."

Thy Peace, you fruit cake, did you ever think that Caner was asked by his boss (Jerry Falwell, Jr.) not to say anything at this time?

Why is it up to you and the losers on this board on how and when Ergun Caner is to make some kind of statement?

Even if Caner did make some kind of reconciliatory statement, it wouldn't be enough for weirdos like yourself, James White, Debbie Kauffman, etc.

As a member of FBC I've not had much to say about your rantings towards Brunson. Many of your complaints are real, legit, justified and genuine.

But when you allow posts that imply indirectly (or directly) that our former pastor (Vines) knew of "molestations" - A CRIME - (not the sexual sins of Gilyard's past that aren't a crime, while reprehensible), it's pretty disturbing.

Anon - let me make one more appeal to you, so that you can see this clearly.

The poster was CLEARLY not referring to Vines having knowledge of Gilyard's crimes for which he is now in jail.

If you refer to the anon's post, you will see this statement:

"Patterson alos supported Gilyard and told his victims they did not have 3 witnesses to his sexual molestation."

Notice, the anon is referring to Gilyard's sexual escapades at Criswell and churches in Texas and Oklahoma as "sexual molestation". So clearly, the person is using the word "molestation" in a very broad sense of sexual sins.

That, coupled with the absolute absurdity of someone thinking Jerry Vines knew of Gilyard's latest crimes when he preached there in 06 and 07, shows you are off base here.

Tom, he/she started a new paragraph after his slanderous comments about Paige Patterson that he/she knows nothing about in the full story.

He/She said this:

"Remember, Vines spoke at Gilyard's church knowing full well of his sexual molestations (emphasis mine) and never said a word."

Tom Rich, sexual molestation is a crime. Having sex outside of the marriage bond, while reprehensible, ESPECIALLY while a pastor and overseer, is not a crime.

Again, let me make this clearer for YOU, Tom Rich: Vines erred on the side of grace and mercy and forgave Gilyard after many, many years. Many years, Tom, of no communication with him after his sexual SIN (not molestations).

The point is, YOU allowed a post to come through your blog (it's moderated, is it not, by you) that gave credence that Vines knew of sexual MOLESTATIONS (a crime - their words, not mine) by Gilyard yet Vines never "said a word."

No, its not "all in the wording." It's in the context. Preachers like to take verses and words out of context to try and draw a conclusion that is not there in the broader context of the scripture.

I read that post and immediately knew the commentor was referring to Patterson and Vines knowing of Gilyard's past sexual "sins." He used the word "molestation", but I knew what he meant.

You seem to imply that you know a lot about Vines' personal and private dealings with Gilyard, and what he did and didn't know and what exactly happened with Tiffany Croft, etc. Personal. Private. Details.

Assuming you really do know these things and are not just a random liar popping off, why not sign your name? Why not email Tom privately, or simply pick up the phone and call him, and ask him to clarify that the commentor was referring to by past sexual sins and to ask him to clarify that "molestation" was too strong a word? Instead, you resort to name calling, and accusations of criminal activity (slander) against Tom AND his wife! Why do those of you at FBC Jax get so defensive, label people, call them names, and drag their wives into it whenever you disagree with a criticism they level?

That kind of response is why there are trespass warnings, name calling of "sociopath" and "coward" in the newspaper, and the resulting two lawsuits against the city and the church.

You people just can not try a kind word, or Matthew 18. Where is the love and forgiveness of Tom that was given to Gilyard and to Tom Messer? Why can't Vines post on here from time to time? That would give legitimacy to Tom's blog wouldn't it? Yes it would. So the fact that Vines preached at conferences with Messer AND Gilyard AFTER newspapers reported their knowledge of, or activity in, sins, gave legitimacy to them.

And now N-O-T-H-I-N-G from Vines on Caner, yet Caner is still on Vines's conference speaking gigs?

By Vines' track record of speaking at conferences with Messer after Messer admitted he knew of Bob Gray's activities and covered them up (as reported in the Jacksonville Times-Union), and spoke at Gilyard's church after newspapers reported several instances of sexual "sins" in various churches, and spoke at FBC Jax after newspapers reported that Mac Brunson called a church member a sociopath in the newspaper and trespassed a man's wife for being married to a man that was blogging, and now has Caner on his speaking gigs...well, Vines actions speak for themselves.

Question since you know so many personal, private, details: Has Jerry Vines ever called Tom and Yvette Rich and ever tried to minister to them, or help them, in any way? Why not? Are they not deserving of the same support and forgiveness (assuming Vines think they sinned somehow) that Brunson, Messer, Gilyard and Caner have received from him? Or does he just offer love and support and kindness and prayers and forgiveness to the "big boys?"

Just re-read the article by Jeff Brumley introducing Mac Brunson to Jacksonville, this is the link to it from Mac's Wikipedia page:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_8037/is_20060213/ai_n47236630/

Very interesting in hindsight when you consider the paper quotes Ergun Caner and Jerry Vines and Mac himself. I wonder how many are true and how many are false and how many are embellished:

1.)"I'm no match for Jerry Vines," Brunson said in an interview with the Times-Union. "I can't fill his shoes." --- TRUE. But feeling the need to say so is telling. And he is still brown-nosing the man that hand-picked him.

2.) "Mac carries in his own groceries, drives his own pickup truck and picks his teeth with a business card," Caner said. "That's Mac, and that's why we love him." --- My personal favorite. So he carries in his own groceries, wow, that is really humble of him. Drives a LEXUS!, not a P/U truck Ergun and I defy anyone who can verify they have ever seen Mac pick his teeth. With a credit card or anything else! But "that is why we love him", really? You love him based on LIES. You love him because he drives a pick-up truck. Caner, Caner, Caner...you are a joke.

3. He worked year- round in his father's retail furniture store, played high school football and attended church faithfully. --- working "year round" in his father's retail store must have been tough while attending church faithfully, going to school and playing H.S. football, all at the same time. And who minded the store while he was at summer church camp? "year round?" really? Perhaps some embellishment about how much he did these activities, if he did them at all? But it sure sounds like all bases are being covered for us good old boys in the South. We love football and working year round and going to church "regularly" don't we.

4. He was saved at the age of 12 at a summer church camp in the Blue Ridge Mountains in North Carolina. (Wow, what a "special place" to be saved. I really like him even more now!) Was he or wasn't he? With Caner's lies already in the article, this line reminds me of "he was raised in Europe..."

5) "I could take you back to the spot where I prayed to receive the Lord." -- So what? Really? Why not host a tour: "Come with the Brunson family to the beautiful Blue Ridge Mountains in North Carolina and walk where Mac "prayed to receive Christ." Pay extra and do some shopping in nearby Greenville...with the Brunson family.

6.) During a telephone interview Saturday -- Brunson said it was Vines who first contacted him about going to Jacksonville. (NOW THIS WE ALL KNOW IS TRUE. Unfortunately... we still went throught the motions of a pastor search committee to dupe the gullible followers.)

7. That was well before Vines publicly announced in May that he would resign the following year, Brunson said. (TRUE dat. Vines hand-picked him long before anyone knew he was going to retire.)

8. "I'll be honest with you, it scared me to death," Brunson preached, clenched fists pulled tightly to his chest. --- Usually I discount anything said after a person tells me "I'll be honest with you" to lead into a sentence. Nice touch though, the clenched fists. Anyone really believe the idea scared him to death?

9)"God will never honor a congregation that sticks to a man instead of the gospel," he said. "It's not a man but Jesus you better follow." ---TRUE, TRUE, TRUE!

If I may, I'd like to offer a little insight into the importance of vetting military speakers. I am a 20 year Navy veteran. I was not involved in the 2003 campaign on Iraq, but I was in the Gulf for Operation Desert Storm.

Having a good understanding of the culture you are going to find yourself engaging with, is of the utmost importance. I happened to spend my first day in the Gulf, in Bahrain. It is the most 'westernized' of all the Arab nations. Even still, the way military people dress in civilian attire can get them hauled off to jail. Women simply cannot wear what most Christian women would consider 'modest' clothing. It's offensive to the local sensibilites and is seen as extremely bad manners in the best case. Within an hour, I found myself in trouble with the authorities because I dared to take a picture of a local mosque.

Within two weeks I found myself in Saudi Arabia. Our plane had landed and we were all herded into a quonsent hut. The pilots didn't say a thing to us about why we were in Saudi Arabia instead of Jebel Ali. I was the senior military member of that flight. After about an hour of waiting, I went to ask the terminal agents if they could inform us of the reason for the delay. They looked right past me. They did not even make eye contact with me other than a brief moment of contempt. I had broken yet another societal law. Women simply do not inquire about anything and Muslim men do not have to speak to any woman if they choose not to. I had to get a person 3 paygrades junior to me, but a male, to get an answer. Remember, in Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive a car or leave their homes without permission from their husbands, father or other male relative.

These things from my own experience might seem to be petty in the big picture. However, I can assure everyone reading, that understanding the culture (especially so if you are a combatant) is absolutely essential.

Having a charlatan such as Ergun Caner, who hadn't grown up in a Muslim country at all, try to explain something he really doesn't have a clue about could have placed our service men and women in serious and dangerous jeopardy. It's also important to understand that what is acceptable in Bahrain or Dubai, simply isn't in Iraq or Kuwait.

Despite the facts, Ergun Caner thinks he can say or do whatever he wants and if a young service man or woman acts on his advice and finds him or herself in real trouble it is of no consequence to him. His ego needs feeding and he didn't care for one second what the implications might have meant. We also need to think about the arrogance of this man. What if the military had properly vetted him? He'd have been found out for the liar he is. Yet he felt sure his own fame and popularity would prevent such an investigation. It is shamful that the military did not vet him.

In my mind, the things he said to those Marines is completely and utterly criminal.

If people such as Guthrie, Lumpkins, Towns, Daleissio, and Geisler want to run to the aid of this man, then they are not worthy of our time. Every Christian should operate out of honesty. If these men will not even stand up to the most basic of Christian values, then we are in worse shape than I ever imagined.

If I may, I'd like to offer a little insight into the importance of vetting military speakers. I am a 20 year Navy veteran. I was not involved in the 2003 campaign on Iraq, but I was in the Gulf for Operation Desert Storm.

Having a good understanding of the culture you are going to find yourself engaging with, is of the utmost importance. I happened to spend my first day in the Gulf, in Bahrain. It is the most 'westernized' of all the Arab nations. Even still, the way military people dress in civilian attire can get them hauled off to jail. Women simply cannot wear what most Christian women would consider 'modest' clothing. It's offensive to the local sensibilites and is seen as extremely bad manners in the best case. Within an hour, I found myself in trouble with the authorities because I dared to take a picture of a local mosque.

Within two weeks I found myself in Saudi Arabia. Our plane had landed and we were all herded into a quonsent hut. The pilots didn't say a thing to us about why we were in Saudi Arabia instead of Jebel Ali. I was the senior military member of that flight. After about an hour of waiting, I went to ask the terminal agents if they could inform us of the reason for the delay. They looked right past me. They did not even make eye contact with me other than a brief moment of contempt. I had broken yet another societal law. Women simply do not inquire about anything and Muslim men do not have to speak to any woman if they choose not to. I had to get a person 3 paygrades junior to me, but a male, to get an answer. Remember, in Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive a car or leave their homes without permission from their husbands, father or other male relative.

These things from my own experience might seem to be petty in the big picture. However, I can assure everyone reading, that understanding the culture (especially so if you are a combatant) is absolutely essential.

Having a charlatan such as Ergun Caner, who hadn't grown up in a Muslim country at all, try to explain something he really doesn't have a clue about could have placed our service men and women in serious and dangerous jeopardy. It's also important to understand that what is acceptable in Bahrain or Dubai, simply isn't in Iraq or Kuwait.

Despite the facts, Ergun Caner thinks he can say or do whatever he wants and if a young service man or woman acts on his advice and finds him or herself in real trouble it is of no consequence to him. His ego needs feeding and he didn't care for one second what the implications might have meant. We also need to think about the arrogance of this man. What if the military had properly vetted him? He'd have been found out for the liar he is. Yet he felt sure his own fame and popularity would prevent such an investigation. It is shamful that the military did not vet him.

In my mind, the things he said to those Marines is completely and utterly criminal.

If people such as Guthrie, Lumpkins, Towns, Daleissio, and Geisler want to run to the aid of this man, then they are not worthy of our time. Every Christian should operate out of honesty. If these men will not even stand up to the most basic of Christian values, then we are in worse shape than I ever imagined.

Clicker

About Me

We're small, insignificant, and harmless. But we have a loud, piercing bark that seems to annoy those in mega churches the most. Not Kool-Aid drinkers, only fresh, filtered water, please; with Grape or Cherry flavoring from Walmart. "Let him alone; God hath bidden him to speak:"